Gen 3:15

  • Thread starter Thread starter myfavoritmartin
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Myfavoritemartian,

why do you like to pick fights with everyone you debate with??
 
NotWorthy said:
In the Hebrew phrase it will bruise your head and you will strike its heel, the pronouns are in the singular and not in the plural, and the pronoun “it” can be translated “he, she, or it.” Again, from AgapeBibleStudy.Com
Click to expand...
Altho the Hebrew pronoun is not gender specific, the verb is. (Think I have that correct - in Hebrew, verbs do denote gender.) And in most of the Hebrew manuscripts now, the verb “bruise/crush” is masculine. As noted in the Haydock footnote however, there were some instances when it was not.

Thanks for the earlier correction NotWorthy. I was in error in my earlier post when I said the Greek did not indicate gender. Greek verbs do not give gender, but their pronouns do. The Greek has a masculine pronoun.
 
Nita said:
Altho the Hebrew pronoun is not gender specific, the verb is. (Think I have that correct - in Hebrew, verbs do denote gender.) And in most of the Hebrew manuscripts now, the verb “bruise/crush” is masculine. As noted in the Haydock footnote however, there were some instances when it was not.

Thanks for the earlier correction NotWorthy. I was in error in my earlier post when I said the Greek did not indicate gender. Greek verbs do not give gender, but their pronouns do. The Greek has a masculine pronoun.
Click to expand...
So “HE” it is, but “she” is also understood to crush the enemy’s head because she bore the Savior, the crusher, and the Holy Church established by the Savior that follows. It was her YES that open the gate for our salvation. Since she is the co-redemptrix, therefore, the co-crusher. 🙂
 
passioncrosslov said:
So “HE” it is, but “she” is also understood to crush the enemy’s head because she bore the Savior, the crusher, and the Holy Church established by the Savior that follows. It was her YES that open the gate for our salvation. Since she is the co-redemptrix, therefore, the co-crusher. 🙂
Click to expand...
Yes. If you think of Judith with the Spear and Jael with the Sword (or is it Jael with the spear and Judith with the sword?), who both destroyed the enemies of Israel. The weapon is what actually killed the enemy and allowed Israel to overcome her foes. These women were all praised, “Most blessed of all women…”, just as Mary was.

Mary’s Fiat allowed the enemy of Satan to come into this world and destroy him. And thus the Church, the New Israel, will overcome!
 
myfavoritmartin said:
Why does the D/R translate this different than all the others?
bible.cc/genesis/3-15.htm

New American Standard Bible (©1995)
And I will put enmity Between you and the woman, And between your seed and her seed; He shall bruise you on the head, And you shall bruise him on the heel."
GOD’S WORD® Translation (©1995)
I will make you and the woman hostile toward each other. I will make your descendants and her descendant hostile toward each other. He will crush your head, and you will bruise his heel."
King James Bible
And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.
American King James Version
And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; it shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel.
American Standard Version
and I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed: he shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.
Bible in Basic English
And there will be war between you and the woman and between your seed and her seed: by him will your head be crushed and by you his foot will be wounded.
Douay-Rheims Bible
I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: **she shall **crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.
Darby Bible Translation
And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; he shall crush thy head, and thou shalt crush his heel.
English Revised Version
and I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed: it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.
Webster’s Bible Translation
And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed: it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.
World English Bible
I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring. He will bruise your head, and you will bruise his heel."
Young’s Literal Translation
and enmity I put between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; he doth bruise thee – the head, and thou dost bruise him – the heel.’
Click to expand...
Her seed or offspring refers to all of her offspring (see for example and compare the use of this term in Bereshit 16:9). It is therefore not referring to a single individual but to humanity. The male singular pronoun in the Hebrew is therefore man or mankind. The you or thee is the snake as we learn from reading the previous passage.
 
NotWorthy said:
In the Hebrew phrase it will bruise your head and you will strike its heel, the pronouns are in the singular and not in the plural, and the pronoun “it” can be translated “he, she, or it.” Again, from AgapeBibleStudy.Com
Click to expand...
Who conquered satan NW?
Christ or Mary?
Does the catholic church not teach this as a protoevangelon of the Christs work on the cross???
 
tobinatorstark said:
Myfavoritemartian,

why do you like to pick fights with everyone you debate with??
Click to expand...
Excuse me?
who have I and how have I picked any fights?
NW is a friend and brother in the LORD…So surely your not speaking of him and i?
i am simply trying to find out why the DR translated this as such…
 
myfavoritmartin said:
Who conquered satan NW?
Christ or Mary?
Does the catholic church not teach this as a protoevangelon of the Christs work on the cross???
Click to expand...
Of course it was Christ. And yes, the Church teaches that, it is the Proto-Evangelion, the First Gospel, the Good News of Christ.

So, what is the problem?
 
NotWorthy said:
Of course it was Christ. And yes, the Church teaches that, it is the Proto-Evangelion, the First Gospel, the Good News of Christ.

So, what is the problem?
Click to expand...
its that it say SHE crushes the head of the serpent…
You don’t find this even in the least a bit strange?
 
NotWorthy said:
Of course it was Christ. And yes, the Church teaches that, it is the Proto-Evangelion, the First Gospel, the Good News of Christ.

So, what is the problem?
Click to expand...
myfavoritmartin said:
its that it say SHE crushes the head of the serpent…
You don’t find this even in the least a bit strange?
Click to expand...
Furthermore taking the angle of insisting that Mary crushed Satan through Jesus, would imply that she sacrificed Him for us?
 
also to note the catholic encyclopedia says the following about "she"

“it originated after the fourth century, and cannot be defended critically”

HERE

So the question remains why does DR use it?
 
on the EWTN website:
The Holy Father Blessed Pius IX wrote on this score in his bull Ineffabilis Deus, declaring the dogma of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary [December 8, 1854] stated: “Hence, just as Christ, the Mediator between God and man, assumed human nature, blotted the handwriting of the decree that stood against us, and fastened it to the cross, so the most holy Virgin, united with Him by a most intimate and indissoluble bond, was with Him and through Him, eternally at enmity with the evil serpent, and most completely triumped over him, and thus crushed his head with her immaculate foot.”
Click to expand...
When Pope John Paul II published the latest version of the Vulgate in 1999, the Latin reflects this ambiguity. It says “ipsum conteret” (he or it will crush), as does what follows “eius calcaneum” (his to its heel). While his promulgation of the Vulgate merely confirms the ambiguity of the scholarly trend, it is not one that should trouble Catholics. If the text says, “he shall crush the head of the serpent and it shall strike at his heel,” it merely affirms what the Catholic faith has always affirmed, the defeat of Satan is the work of Christ. In this, Mary’s role as his singular cooperator, as the Woman, the New Eve, is contained, not diminished. As many saints and mystics have said, her role will be uniquely important preceding the Second Coming, as it was preceding the First. That role depends on who and what she is in salvation history, and not on this text.
Click to expand...
 
myfavoritmartin said:
its that it say SHE crushes the head of the serpent…
You don’t** find this even in the least a bit strange**?
Click to expand...
I accept the current “He” in the NAB translation while still remaining open to the possibility of “she”.

The following are just some of my own personal thoughts.
**I wouldn’t find it at all strange **if God should choose to use a woman as the direct instrument through which Satan will be crushed. (The power of/in the woman to accomplish this being of course God’s power - merited by Jesus and bestowed on her for this purpose). It is interesting to ponder this in relation to the events of the Fall in the garden. The serpent tempted Eve, Eve believed him and ate. She then took it to Adam and he ate - his eating being determining act that caused mankind’s Fall.

The progression, so to speak, of the fall = satan, Eve, Adam
Redemption, the reversal/undoing of the fall = Jesus, Mary, satan
(A “reversal” with the New Adam and the new Eve)

It certainly would be a greater blow to satan’s pride if it was done through a woman whose nature was only human (lower than the angelic nature) - rather than by someone with an equal (another angel) or a higher nature (God).

Just interesting to ponder.

Nita
 
myfavoritmartin said:
its that it say SHE crushes the head of the serpent…
You don’t find this even in the least a bit strange?
Click to expand...
Since I don’t use the D/R Bible, no I don’t. Its not the official Bible of the Catholic Church from what I understand. But I don’t spend much time questioning every error in every translation. I don’t think **any **Bible could stand very long under that criticism.

Personally, I prefer the “He shall strike your head”, for it describes what Christ did on the Cross!
 
myfavoritmartin said:
also to note the catholic encyclopedia says the following about "she"

“it originated after the fourth century, and cannot be defended critically”

HERE

So the question remains why does DR use it?
Click to expand...
The only question remaining to me is why this is so important to you. If its a mistake, its a mistake. It didn’t create or change any Catholic Doctrine. Any time you have translations, you will encounter mistakes that can drive the best of allies into ex-brothers.

There’s bigger fish to fry.
 
The New Testament does not mention Eve, as the progenitor through whom we inherit “original sin”, nor is Mary referred to as the “New Eve”, but rather:

*Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression, who is a figure of Him that was to come. *
Romans 5:14

*For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive. And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit. *
1Corinthians 15:22&45

It is through Adam, the head of the human race that our sin nature is derived, and the curse conferred…
 
NotWorthy said:
The only question remaining to me is why this is so important to you. If its a mistake, its a mistake. It didn’t create or change any Catholic Doctrine. Any time you have translations, you will encounter mistakes that can drive the best of allies into ex-brothers.

There’s bigger fish to fry.
Click to expand...
I see it as HUGELY instrumental in the forwarding of Marian doctrine and to the developing of a nearly deistic identity on Mary.

How could one NOT?
 
myfavoritmartin said:
I see it as HUGELY instrumental in the forwarding of Marian doctrine and to the developing of a nearly deistic identity on Mary.

How could one NOT?
Click to expand...
Maybe because all the Marian Doctrine’s pre-date St. Jerome’s “Faux Pas” by several centuries.

If these Doctrines were developed mainly on this interpretation in the Vulgate, then you would have a most valid point. But the Church was teaching these Truths about Mary long before then.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top